>>>>> "MS" == Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx> writes: MS> Current guidelines disallow static libs, That is not true. They merely discourage it. "Package doesn't build as a dynamic library" is certainly sufficient justification. MS> reviewers point that out, packagers make up a soname and version, MS> and reviewers accept it. If they're going to make up a soname, they should at least start at 0. However, I don't see how the issue of inventing a soname is relevant here. MS> Instead, they ought to reject such packages and request MS> involvement of upstream developers in deciding on a soname and MS> library versioning scheme. Certainly we shouldn't be going to steps to turn static libraries into dynamic ones without at least trying to talk to upstream about the issue. We shouldn't be making _any_ significant alterations to any packaged software without trying to talk to upstream. - J< -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
